Removing unwanted vegetation such as weeds from lawns, gardens, plant beds, and other areas can be tedious, particularly without tools. Numerous gardening tools have been devised for extracting weeds and other vegetation, and are referred to herein generally as “weed pullers”. These tools typically have tines or blades that are designed to capture the vegetation by the roots, along with some of the surrounding soil (which can include dirt, sand, and other mediums in which such vegetation takes root). Some of the tools have tines or blades that are inserted into the soil about the roots and then rotated to extract most or all of the root along with a plug of soil, to prevent the undesired vegetation from growing back. The extracted vegetation may then be removed from the tool and discarded.
Some weed pullers using rotating blades or tines also include an ejector mechanism for removing the extracted vegetation from between the blades or tines. Examples of this type are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 2,030,770 to Smith and U.S. Pat. No. 4,603,744 to Ramirez. Such ejector mechanisms are typically fairly complicated and are thus more prone to failure. The Smith patent discloses ejector mechanism components, such as a biasing spring, that are at least partially enclosed in a housing. This arrangement makes the components relatively inaccessible for cleaning or repair. The Ramirez tool discloses a potentially more accessible biasing spring, but at least one embodiment of its ejector mechanism may be mechanically imbalanced, making the tool prone to failing or operating inefficiently.
The tines of many weed-pulling devices resemble narrow prongs, which generally have a smaller cross-sectional area than blades, as well as a narrower “circumferential” width, as measured with reference to a circular path followed by the tines or blades in rotation about a shaft axis. In some instances, the decreased cross-section of these tines increases ease of penetration but decreases their torsional strength and rigidity. The narrower tines are typically less capable of retaining a plug of soil. Devices of this type are disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,326,743, 5,005,888, 5,004,283, 944,393, and Design Patent 322,918. By contrast, the increased circumferential width of blades may desirably increase torsional strength and rigidity, with a slight reduction in the ease of penetration.
Many weed pullers having blades or tines pose safety risks. Some have teeth, serrations, or other sharp features on the blades, which may endanger the operator. Some of these tools are powered with motors, such as drill motors, which increase their efficacy but also increase the risk of injury.
Other patents of interest include U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,810,093, 3,554,293, 3,847,227, 3,198,719, 2,779,259, and 5,452,767.
The present invention overcomes many of the disadvantages of other weed pulling devices. An improved gardening tool is disclosed that is relatively economical, safe, and easy to use, and that provides a more reliable mechanism for ejecting extracted vegetation.